linux-kernel - [PATCH v1 1/1] certs: Explain the rational to call panic()

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20220321174548.510516-2-mic@digikod.net>
Date:   Mon, 21 Mar 2022 18:45:48 +0100
From:   Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>
To:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
Cc:     Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@...cle.com>,
        Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ux.microsoft.com>
Subject: [PATCH v1 1/1] certs: Explain the rational to call panic()

From: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ux.microsoft.com>

The blacklist_init() function calls panic() for memory allocation
errors.  This change documents the reason why we don't return -ENODEV.

Suggested-by: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com> [1]
Requested-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org> [1]
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/YjeW2r6Wv55Du0bJ@iki.fi [1]
Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ux.microsoft.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220321174548.510516-2-mic@digikod.net
---
 certs/blacklist.c | 8 ++++++++
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)

diff --git a/certs/blacklist.c b/certs/blacklist.c
index 486ce0dd8e9c..ac26bcf9b9a5 100644
--- a/certs/blacklist.c
+++ b/certs/blacklist.c
@@ -307,6 +307,14 @@ static int restrict_link_for_blacklist(struct key *dest_keyring,
 
 /*
  * Initialise the blacklist
+ *
+ * The blacklist_init() function is registered as an initcall via
+ * device_initcall().  As a result the functionality doesn't load and the
+ * kernel continues on executing.  While cleanly returning -ENODEV could be
+ * acceptable for some non-critical kernel parts, if the blacklist keyring
+ * fails to load it defeats the certificate/key based deny list for signed
+ * modules.  If a critical piece of security functionality that users expect to
+ * be present fails to initialize, panic()ing is likely the right thing to do.
  */
 static int __init blacklist_init(void)
 {
-- 
2.35.1